Will Weapons Values Be Reviewed?

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

I stopped playing TOAW:COW years ago and tossed the CD into the trash. Why? Because the numbers were busted and there was no editor that I could use to fix them.

a) 99% of the numbers are fine, and 90% of the objections are highly debatable.
b) There is a database editor for COW and there will shortly be one for TOAW III.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

It just end up to the fact that the TOAW PzIII lack 1 AT attack factor to match Brit tanks armor, so only have a 64% "kill" chance where the tiny 2-pdr is rated equal or more than PzIII armor with a 100% kill. That's just wrong...

I don't think so. Consistently in reading about British Armour in the desert the problem they had was the German towed AT guns, not the German tanks, which were usually elsewhere anyway.

The long-barreled 50mm gun arms the Pz-IIIJ and upwards in the TOAW database and gets an AT value of six. Early short-barreled 50mm guns (which even by October 1942 made up almost half of all the Pz-IIIs in the DAK) have an AT value of four. The 2 pounder has an AT value of five, which is pretty much in line with its effectiveness.

I think the problem is that you're comparing the best of the German armour (with the long barelled 50mm and 75mm guns) with the average of British armour in order to argue how the averages of both should compare.

[vahauser]

Golden,

I'll be looking forward to the happy day when that editor becomes available with my credit card ready.

[Chuck2]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

It just end up to the fact that the TOAW PzIII lack 1 AT attack factor to match Brit tanks armor, so only have a 64% "kill" chance where the tiny 2-pdr is rated equal or more than PzIII armor with a 100% kill. That's just wrong...

I don't think so. Consistently in reading about British Armour in the desert the problem they had was the German towed AT guns, not the German tanks, which were usually elsewhere anyway.

The long-barreled 50mm gun arms the Pz-IIIJ and upwards in the TOAW database and gets an AT value of six. Early short-barreled 50mm guns (which even by October 1942 made up almost half of all the Pz-IIIs in the DAK) have an AT value of four. The 2 pounder has an AT value of five, which is pretty much in line with its effectiveness.

I think the problem is that you're comparing the best of the German armour (with the long barelled 50mm and 75mm guns) with the average of British armour in order to argue how the averages of both should compare.

Well, it should also be understood that in TOAW towed AT weapons and motorized AT weapons act differently. Towed AT weapons are quite ineffective on the attack, for example.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Chuck2
Well, it should also be understood that in TOAW towed AT weapons and motorized AT weapons act differently. Towed AT weapons are quite ineffective on the attack, for example.

Yeah. This is a problem for things like Flanders in 1940 where they were used offensively in TOAW terms. Less so for the desert war, though.

[a white rabbit]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Golden,

I'll be looking forward to the happy day when that editor becomes available with my credit card ready.

..either rebuy acow (silly boy), or buy T3 and be patient..

[Akmatov]

Hmm, guess I didn't make my point as well as I might. I was omitting a step in which the TOAW system uses a table to rein in excessive values. I omitted it on purpose to show the extreme variation created by the system, but shouldn't have as the table (Anti-Armour Chance to Defeat Armour per Hit, TOAW-COW Manual, p 123) is used by the game to truncate calculated values into a proscribed range of values.

Anti-Armour Chance to Defeat Armour per Hit
pq=100xAnti-Armor/Defensive Armor = Chance to Kill
100+ = 100%
99...25 = ((pq^2)/100)%
24- = 0%

So, OK, including Targeting with normal visability here are the revised values for the Overall % Chance to Kill a target:

Attacker vs Defender - Overall % Chance to Kill
A-10 vs T-64(Imp) - 26%
AH-1 Cobra vs " - 85%*
AH-1 Cobra(Imp) vs " - 100%*
F-111(Late) vs " - 8%**

* these are so good that they are reined in by the table to a max value limited only by their targeting capability
** I included the F-111 because in Gulf War I, the F-111 with laser guided bombs was a major factor in destroying tanks and artillery. Possibly this is something fixable with the Precision Munitions value. Seems a reasonable use of that value.

I still think the A-10 is being grossly undervalued, which leads me to wonder about the Air to AT values in general. But it is not as bad as I thought at first. But I still don't think one Cobra is worth three A-10s. But I could be wrong. The terribly index Gulf War Survey is very shy of providing hard answers to that sort of question.